6 ms·

My perception of the history of long-distance American railroads (not ones that were built for a specific task like connecting a mine to a market) is that many

My perception of the history of long-distance American railroads (not ones that were built for a specific task like connecting a mine to a market) is that many of them -- maybe even most of them -- were failures in their first iteration. After going bankrupt and ruining a lot of investors, others bought the assets at fire-sale prices, and the opportunity to avoid the massive capital outlay of actually building the lines is what made them profitable in the long run.

Gibbon1 3y ago
The first railroad over the Appalachians bankrupted the first two groups of investors. The third attempt managed to run a line through and it changed the world. Because unfathomable amounts of cheap grain from Ohio appeared on the international market. Big issue with rail is there are huge network effects are impossible to price in pure market. Which is why except for the US and Britain most countries built state owned rail. Britain and the US eventually nationalized or quasi nationalize rail. And attempts at privatization seem to fail.
- WalterBright 3y ago
  > attempts at privatization seem to fail Heavy regulation is the usual culprit.
- MoreSEMI 3y ago
  In the case of the US I think you mean Amtrak is nationalized? But that’s passenger rail. The us has a private freight rail system, which is from what I understand, is one of the best in the world.
  - panick21_ 3y ago
    US railroads love the pat themselves on the back for their cargo rail. They are very profitable for the investors of those rail networks. But calling them best in the world is nonsense. They just have lots and lots of old infrastructure that they can use and they don't need to share their rail with passenger travel, and their only responsibility is making a profit so they can cut anything away that isn't profitable. Of course that then just leads to more traffic and trucks on the road. So far worse for the nation as a whole.
  - Gibbon1 3y ago
    The US nationalize Amtrak because the railroads were going to stop doing passenger service all together. But 100 years ago rail in the US and Britain were busted out. The British nationalized their rail. The US turned rail into a semi-regulated monopoly. Notable in the US due to geography the economy depends on freight rail to move bulk goods at least part of the way. Writings I've seen basically say transportation systems fail under the free market eventually.
- rasz 3y ago
  Sounds like first Atlantic telegraph cable https://www.filfre.net/2022/01/a-web-around-the-world-part-2-if-at-first-you-dont-succeed/ https://www.filfre.net/2022/01/a-web-around-the-world-part-2... https://www.filfre.net/2022/02/a-web-around-the-world-part-3-try-try-again/ https://www.filfre.net/2022/02/a-web-around-the-world-part-3...
- fbdab103 3y ago
  That is surprising to me. I would have thought there was already a robust shipping network through the Mississippi river. Eventually, I would expect the amortized costs of a rail network to beat river barges, but that would take a significant time.

Gibbon1 3y ago

The first railroad over the Appalachians bankrupted the first two groups of investors. The third attempt managed to run a line through and it changed the world. Because unfathomable amounts of cheap grain from Ohio appeared on the international market. Big issue with rail is there are huge network effects are impossible to price in pure market. Which is why except for the US and Britain most countries built state owned rail. Britain and the US eventually nationalized or quasi nationalize rail. And attempts at privatization seem to fail.

WalterBright 3y ago
> attempts at privatization seem to fail Heavy regulation is the usual culprit.
MoreSEMI 3y ago
In the case of the US I think you mean Amtrak is nationalized? But that’s passenger rail. The us has a private freight rail system, which is from what I understand, is one of the best in the world.
- panick21_ 3y ago
  US railroads love the pat themselves on the back for their cargo rail. They are very profitable for the investors of those rail networks. But calling them best in the world is nonsense. They just have lots and lots of old infrastructure that they can use and they don't need to share their rail with passenger travel, and their only responsibility is making a profit so they can cut anything away that isn't profitable. Of course that then just leads to more traffic and trucks on the road. So far worse for the nation as a whole.
- Gibbon1 3y ago
  The US nationalize Amtrak because the railroads were going to stop doing passenger service all together. But 100 years ago rail in the US and Britain were busted out. The British nationalized their rail. The US turned rail into a semi-regulated monopoly. Notable in the US due to geography the economy depends on freight rail to move bulk goods at least part of the way. Writings I've seen basically say transportation systems fail under the free market eventually.
rasz 3y ago
Sounds like first Atlantic telegraph cable https://www.filfre.net/2022/01/a-web-around-the-world-part-2-if-at-first-you-dont-succeed/ https://www.filfre.net/2022/01/a-web-around-the-world-part-2... https://www.filfre.net/2022/02/a-web-around-the-world-part-3-try-try-again/ https://www.filfre.net/2022/02/a-web-around-the-world-part-3...
fbdab103 3y ago
That is surprising to me. I would have thought there was already a robust shipping network through the Mississippi river. Eventually, I would expect the amortized costs of a rail network to beat river barges, but that would take a significant time.